Introduction

On 3 April 1997, the UN Commission on Human Rights approved Resolution 1997/12, (‘Question of the Death Penalty’), presented by Italy with forty-five other countries co-sponsoring: the resolution was passed with twenty-seven votes in favour, eleven against and fourteen abstentions. It is not surprising that the issue of the death penalty should be addressed by retentionist countries in a relativist mode, and it is significant to note that the two groups, that is Asian and Islamic countries, that held the forefront, especially at the 53rd session of the Commission, in the battle against the Italian resolution, are the most vocal and most articulate in developing the theme of relativism in all matters pertaining to human rights. Countries in the Far East, South Korea, North Korea, China and Japan, are probably the most articulate and the earliest proponents of the relativist approach. All these countries included in their arguments the complaint that the resolution proposed by Italy constituted an inadmissible attempt, on a matter as delicate as that of capital punishment, to impose views that were culturally specific and did not show sufficient respect for other traditions, and which were also – particularly as far as the Islamic countries were concerned – of a religious nature.

As far as the issue of capital punishment is concerned, a major component of ‘Asian values’ is Confucianism, which is characterised by justice and retribution.

South Korea: from retentionist to de facto abolitionist?

The supreme penalty under Korean law is death by hanging.